Hello all, This is a little premature, since we don't know what will happen to the Bill once it gets to the House, but I suggest if we are still not satisfied, we make it an election issue. Every candidate who wants our vote should be questioned by each one of us over and over again. The question should be posed at town halls, coffee parties and candidates' debates. Maybe then even the press will take notice that this is an issue of great importance to a lot of Canadians as well as those with Canadian ancestry. (I am presently doing some census research for a client in Australia.) These candidates should be made aware that a vote for them depends on how they respond. It's too bad we can't have some influence to get the question asked at one of the Liberal leadership debates - although the way they like to avoid making real statements means we may not get anything near a concrete response. By the way, my e-mail letter to Paul Martin which I sent over a week ago has still not been read (or deleted). I am going to print it off and mail a hard copy as well. I know Gordon, Muriel and Senator Milne got copies, but I am not sure I posted it to the list. I am including it below. Apologies if this is a duplication. Patty ************************** Mr. Paul Martin Member of Parliament House of Commons Ottawa K1A 0A6 Dear Mr. Martin, I was with great interest that I read the account in the Ottawa Citizen of your speech at the Crossing Boundaries Conference last week. You mentioned that "the public service is not an 'alternative legislature' and should stick to consulting Canadians on policy, but leave the decision-making to MPs." Your remarks reminded me of the continuing struggle we have had over the release of the post 1901 census records. The 1906 records have now finally been released to the public - 5 years after the date at which the law required it. The struggle to get these records released eventually came about because those in favour won a legal battle - one many of us have felt all along was unnecessary; and was only required because of determined resistance from a public servant -Dr Ivan Fellegi of StatsCan - who refers to a commitment to privacy that he claims exists, but which he has never been able to produce as evidence. A simple position might be taken that he flaunted the laws of Canada with impunity for 5 years and continues to do so. I am heartened to see your comments on 'reining in' bureaucrats who overstep their boundaries and venture into the making of policy decisions and I hope this means that you are in favour of unrestricted access to census records after the 92 year withholding period as has been the case for the last 235 years. However, to my knowledge, you have never clearly stated where you stand on this issue. The census scorecard at http://globalgenealogy.com/Census/Score4.htm#PQ shows you as undecided. I am therefore asking you as someone seeking the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada and as someone who could be our next Prime Minister, to state clearly where you stand on this issue. I believe you owe it to the citizens of this country. There is currently a government Bill S-13 which is at 3rd reading in the Senate, and I wish to request your support for some amendments to that bill when / if it reaches Parliament. This Bill puts forward a plan for release of post-1906 census records, however, the Bill as presently proposed contains serious flaws which will restrict the very access genealogists and historians are seeking both now and more seriously, into the future. Unfortunately, the Senate avoided the best opportunity to review the Bill when the Senate Standing Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology returned the Bill to the Senate without considering any amendments or reviewing the clauses in any detail. Perhaps some amendments will be proposed from the Senate floor, but if not, I hope you will support the wishes of the people on this matter. There are 3 particular situations that need to be addressed in amendments: 1 -- Clause 8 (the "informed consent" clause for future Censuses) needs to be removed. Failing removal of Clause 8, it must be changed to be an OPT-OUT provision rather than OPT-IN. The problem is that Clause 8 would require me to decide now if the information on my Census form should be made public 92 or more years from now, and requires me to make that decision for my dependents as well, with no apparent way for any of them to change it when they reach major age. By making it Opt-In, the assumption is that you want the information hidden even if you say nothing. (Imagine if we ran our elections that way - assuming that all the citizens who didn't vote, were in support of the government!) Since census records have been made public, there has never been a reported complaint in the USA, Canada or Great Britain (that's at least 1 billion Census forms). Neither Great Britain nor the USA have an informed consent question on their forms - nonetheless their records are released on schedule and in entirety. 2 -- The 1911 and 1916 Census records need to be released without restriction, on the same basis as those for 1906 (and 235 years of earlier records) have been previously released. There seems no basis for NOT doing this since the legislative situation in 1911 and 1916 were identical to 1906. The 1911 census records, based on the 92 year law, are due to be released this summer. 3 -- The additional "20-year non-disclosure clause" and the "undertaking" also need to be removed. This refers to an additional waiting period allowing full access but only partial disclosure which effectively makes unfettered access to the Canadian Census available only after 112 years! The similar period in the USA is 72 years, again, without any complaints so far. These 3 requests, and other areas of concern with S-13, are covered in much greater depth (and eloquence) in the submission to the Senate committee by Mr. Gordon Watts, viewable at: http://globalgenealogy.com/Census/S13written.htm. I remind you that what we seek is exactly the same unrestricted access to records after 1901 that is currently available for those records up to and including 1901. Please let me know where you stand on this issue. You can respond to me at the address above or electronically, if you prefer, at [email protected] Thank you for your time, I await your reply, Patricia McGregor